“We all hate cyclists, but is violence the answer?” Aussie Daily Telegraph's inflammatory headline; Owen Jones takes on cycling Twitter; Design the USA’s new jersey – and get one free; Where do you store your bike?; I’m Cavendish! + more on the live blog

hawkinspeter wrote:

The problem with cutting fuel duty is that it won't even necessarily reduce forecourt prices - that's down to the whims of the oil companies. I'd say that reducing household gas/electric bills would be of far more use in actually helping the poorest.

You mean like they've passed the (very) recent drop in wholesale oil prices on to the customer?

Oh, waitaminute... 

Reducing household gas/electic should happen alongside a fuel duty cut. We haven't waved a magic wand and made the internal combustion engine dissappear, and those on lower wages, night workers, nurses etc will be the ones far less likely to be using new EV's or able to use public transport. They'll be struggling to make ends meet while wondering how to fill the tank of a 10 year old fiesta to get to work.

My issue with things like the IEA plan is they often are enaceted as a one size fits all. Take public transport which is key to any progress. Stating it should be made cheaper is great, but it needs to work. 20 miles out of London I can't rely on the trains at the weekend and bus services are even worse, people in rural locations are more often than not even worse off.

Adam Sutton wrote:

Reducing household gas/electic should happen alongside a fuel duty cut. We haven't waved a magic wand and made the internal combustion engine dissappear, and those on lower wages, night workers, nurses etc will be the ones far less likely to be using new EV's or able to use public transport. They'll be struggling to make ends meet while wondering how to fill the tank of a 10 year old fiesta to get to work.

My issue with things like the IEA plan is they often are enaceted as a one size fits all. Take public transport which is key to any progress. Stating it should be made cheaper is great, but it needs to work. 20 miles out of London I can't rely on the trains at the weekend and bus services are even worse, people in rural locations are more often than not even worse off.

Personally, I don't want to encourage anyone to continue using a 10 year old Fiesta. Assuming that a bicycle can be obtained, then I'd be pushing for that to be used instead, which is going to be cheaper and healthier. (Of course, I can easily state that as I'm sat here working from home, but when I do go into the office, it's a 37km ride each way).

I can sympathise with the poor state of public transport, but that's what happens when all our transport acorns are put into the private car basket. If we design society around the private car, then naturally the private car seems to be the only choice.

We're in the middle of a climate emergency, so it's about time we started acting like it.

hawkinspeter wrote:

Personally, I don't want to encourage anyone to continue using a 10 year old Fiesta. Assuming that a bicycle can be obtained, then I'd be pushing for that to be used instead, which is going to be cheaper and healthier. (Of course, I can easily state that as I'm sat here working from home, but when I do go into the office, it's a 37km ride each way).

I can sympathise with the poor state of public transport, but that's what happens when all our transport acorns are put into the private car basket. If we design society around the private car, then naturally the private car seems to be the only choice.

We're in the middle of a climate emergency, so it's about time we started acting like it.

Driving a 10yr old fiesta is a reality for a large number of people though. Yes we are in a climate emergency but rushing through ill thought out plans that will harm the worse off isn't an answer. We cannot expect to effect positive change overnight with knee jerk policies. Public transport needs to be run as a service for public and if we want people to cycle more we need proper infrastructure that will take time. I would love to encourage my sister to cycle to work, but know here commute of around 5 miles is impossible to achieve in a manner I see as safe at this time by bike.

In 2018 I started cycling to the next station on the line due to timetable changes messing things up at my closest station. That was 2 miles and I thought I was going to collapse at the end of if for the first few weeks. A year later I rode London to Brighton and today I am considering cycling all the way to work, a round trip of over 50 miles. I will encourange anyone to cycle as I have seen the benefits myself.

IMHO though the kind of attitude prevalent here and in many cycling forums and online in general is not one to encourage people out of cars and to cycle, it more often than not comes across as berating anyone who doesn't cycle. Just commenting the way I have here I am liable to be told by some that I am not a cyclist, I don't understand, my comment and attitude is tantamount to "I have black friends, so I can't be racist"

I just can't get onboard with reducing fuel duty as that's sending entirely the wrong message. It's been frozen for longer than my memory functions and certainly here in Bristol we have illegally high levels of air pollution. If now isn't the time to address climate issues, then when exactly?

And yes, I'd be happy for public ownership of public transport but I'd rather it didn't just turn into a way of enriching the current shareholders which would seem to be the way that our government functions.

Maybe another idea would be to encourage the use of e-scooters by decriminalising them, but that's only going to help shorter journeys. Reducing fuel duty is pretty much encouraging the use of cars for shorter journeys.

hawkinspeter wrote:

I just can't get onboard with reducing fuel duty as that's sending entirely the wrong message. It's been frozen for longer than my memory functions and certainly here in Bristol we have illegally high levels of air pollution. If now isn't the time to address climate issues, then when exactly?

And yes, I'd be happy for public ownership of public transport but I'd rather it didn't just turn into a way of enriching the current shareholders which would seem to be the way that our government functions.

Maybe another idea would be to encourage the use of e-scooters by decriminalising them, but that's only going to help shorter journeys. Reducing fuel duty is pretty much encouraging the use of cars for shorter journeys.

I live near the Dartford tunnel, so am fully aware of pollution. A 5p drop in duty is hardly going to encourage driving when you look at the way prices have escalated in recent months. https://www.racfoundation.org/data/uk-pump-prices-over-time

It may help ease the financial burden on some though who have no choice but to drive.

Personally I think one thing the IEA state that the govt should get behind is working from home and hybrid working. They don't want that though, clearly they want people back in the office, back in towns and cities spending money. If people are only in the office two or three days a week they'd be more likely to try cycling or other means than driving. Being back two days a week myself is why I'm seeing cycling the distance as worth trying.

You don't know the communities I'm involved in.

I'll give you another trivial example. My ex-wife was extremely ginger-haired. It was not do long ago that there was a comedian who made being ginger oppression a running joke on their sketch show. While the comedian was trying to be clever making analogies, the actual result was an increase in nuisance from other people teasing and commenting, joining in the joke.

What the comedian probably didn't know of was the experience of visiting Northern Ireland in the 1980s with ginger hair and a seemingly Catholic name - it could have had extremely serious consequences if the wrong thing was said to the wrong person.

I'm grateful for Rendel's thoughtful reply. I thought I was quite clear, that there is a fundamental level of oppression. I don't agree with playing games of your situation is worse than mine, and I reject the assertion that it is not possible to understand the travails of one group unless you are a part of it.

However, as someone who has been assaulted, threatened, sworn at, put in fear of my life by people simply because I am on a bike, is like to ask what is your definition of oppression? As I say, I have the option of not cycling, so I do not have the inescapable consequences of,say, racism, but we are talking about a world where a rag like the Daily Mail use hatred of cyclists as part of their money-generating business.

Perhaps as a white middle class male my views don't count, but then again, being driven to attempting suicide as a teenager over physical attributes that made me an easy target for bullying doesn't count either.

You and others are doing little more than continue to try and rationlise your missapropriation of the term "oppressed", therefore diminishing its impact in real world terms.

There is little difference in this to those who cry racism, homophobia etc at every opportunity, which if anything contributes to people turning a blind eye to genuine racism etc.

Adam Sutton wrote:

You and others are doing little more than continue to try and rationlise your missapropriation of the term "oppressed", therefore diminishing its impact in real world terms.

There is little difference in this to those who cry racism, homophobia etc at every opportunity, which if anything contributes to people turning a blind eye to genuine racism etc.

I'm so sorry - I agree with you, but cannot resist posting this picture

I don't think anyone need apologies for a Monty Python reference! 

What does Some Mothers Do Have'em have to do with any of this?

The hell you on about man?

That's all I could see!!

Also add national newspapers and public figures running campaigns against cyclists, publishing "jokes" about ways to kill cyclists and denigrating when money is spent on cycling provision and you can see what would be termed "oppression" if angled at other communities. As protections are rightly brought in for some sections, the arseholes who want to target people who are different to them will choose different targets. And it will sadly be the same people Adam hears in the pub in most cases. 

Adam Sutton wrote:

I am gay and grew up in the 80's/90's, educatued under Thatchers section 28, with nowhere to turn. Hitting low points of suicidal thoughts, thinking of endless ways to end myself. Eventually accepting myself, the saving grace was I am a white English man and introvert that doesn't draw attention, but that has drawn attention of homophobes who don't think I am gay. Sitting in a pub having someone tell me they think "all gays should be strung up" and countless other conversations. I could go on, but no when when I am cycling I am not an "oppressed miniority" SMDH. I face issues but to make that comparison to the genuinely oppressed is insulting. I am not sure any countries will execute someone for being a cyclist. There are I believe 13 countries where I would be put to death for who I love.

I think some of you have misunderstood Adams point. He simply states he alone does not feel part of an "oppressed minority" as a cyclist and illustrates this with his experiences as a gay man. At no point does he say cyclists are not an oppressed minority or claim to speak for anyone else. He is simply giving us his personal opinion on his own situation.

As a straight, white guy the only time I've occasionally felt part of an "oppressed minority" is when I'm on my bike being abused by entitled motorists, but that in no way diminishes Adams point of view as his does not diminish mine.

NOtotheEU wrote:

At no point does he say cyclists are not an oppressed minority.

Well I read 'not genuinely oppressed' as exactly that: "I face issues but to make that comparison to the genuinely oppressed is insulting."

Not sure why this has turned into a competition to find the most genuinely oppressed group. Isn't any form of oppression bad?

I read that differently but that's a fair comment. 

I completely agree that oppression is bad. It's strange how any oppression we feel as individuals does not always make us more supportive of others suffering different forms of it, it's human nature I guess.

HoarseMann wrote:

Not sure why this has turned into a competition to find the most genuinely oppressed group. Isn't any form of oppression bad?

No one is trying to find the most genuinely oppressed group, but misappropriating the term diminishes it. As hawkinspeter said, I think "abuse" is the more appropriate term here. I honestly think making such ridculous statements about cyclists being oppressed does nothing to win people over to uderstanding the challenges cyclists face.

Adam Sutton wrote:

I think "abuse" is the more appropriate term here

Well you're not going to be sentenced to death for being a cyclist (a local councillor did actually call for that on our town's facebook page though!). But when you've got authorities like the police demonstrating an anti-cycling bias by failing to take seriously incidents where a cyclist's life has been put at risk. Or a justice system that fails to deliver justice when a cyclist's life has been taken. It does seem a bit more than name-calling type abuse.

HoarseMann wrote:

Well you're not going to be sentenced to death for being a cyclist (a local councillor did actually call for that on our town's facebook page though!). But when you've got authorities like the police demonstrating an anti-cycling bias by failing to take seriously incidents where a cyclist's life has been put at risk. Or a justice system that fails to deliver justice when a cyclist's life has been taken. It does seem a bit more than name-calling type abuse.

And whatever you may think, that is still not oppression. None of it is right, but you are not being "oppressed". Moreover in a court of law you would have a strong case.

Adam Sutton wrote:

And whatever you may think, that is still not oppression. None of it is right, but you are not being "oppressed". Moreover in a court of law you would have a strong case.

Well it's not on the same level as state persecution, but I do think hatred towards cyclists can be considered a form of social oppression. It can certainly feel oppressive to be on the receiving end of it, as it's experienced so frequently.

Keep reaching.

Adam Sutton wrote:

Keep reaching.

Alright then!... State persecution is the ultimate manifestation of social oppression. It doesn't come out of nowhere.

Digger deeper there's another straw to clutch somewhere.

Adam Sutton wrote:

No one is trying to find the most genuinely oppressed group, but misappropriating the term diminishes it. As hawkinspeter said, I think "abuse" is the more appropriate term here.

You have inadvertently put your finger on the weakness of your argument here: "abuse" can mean many different things, from rape and murder to someone calling one a dickhead; similarly with oppression. Having suffered oppression (on a revolting and terrifying scale which I find it impossible even to imagine, in your case) does not make the oppressed gatekeepers of the term.

Wow, sure Rendall. That's a new level of trying to excuse the nonsense here.

No, I am not trying to "gatekeep" the term "oppression" as a gay man. My comment on there being no competition, is that there is no competition between any minority group facing real oppression, day in, day out, 24/7.

If I've gained anything in life it is empathy towards the truly oppressed, be it race, religion, gender or any other inate inescapable part of a person's being. Equally though is apathy towards people who want to cry oppression for something as mundane and totally legal as riding a bike or any negative experience whilst doing such a thing.

In simple terms my being a cyclist and yours, cycling is a minor part of life. Off the bike it is irrelevant. Every single day, every social interaction with new people, I ask myself whether to be my true self or hide "that" part of who I am. Other groups of oppressed people do the same, does a Muslim woman remove her hijab in situations for safety sake? When it comes to race that's not so easy.

Adam Sutton wrote:

cycling is a minor part of life

What?!!

HoarseMann wrote:

Adam Sutton wrote:

cycling is a minor part of life

What?!!

Burn him!!

[Wait - would that be oppressing him?]

mdavidford wrote:

HoarseMann wrote:

Adam Sutton wrote:

cycling is a minor part of life

What?!!

Burn him!!

[Wait - would that be oppressing him?]

If running him over for being a cyclist isn't oppressing him then I don't see how burning him for being a heretic can be! 

You haven't really dealt with the fundamental principle though of what is oppression, you just say it doesn't exist.

Similarly, you belittle me for suggesting that cyclists are subject to oppressive behaviour, I would add, not just from individuals, but from politicians - for example there enthusiasm for Draconian punishments after there was a single, highly published death by a cyclist who was foolish and careless, yet hundreds of cyclists die and motorists are often framed as victims of circumstance, having to live with the guilt of a momentary lapse; then there are the police who are unwilling to act on behalf of cyclists who have been attacked by motorists in their cars. In separate posts, I've mentioned on Sunday, I got coaled, on Tuesday at least 6 people shouted abuse simply for me being on a bike where no traffic was delayed or hindered - the greatest delay was slowing down to shout, and the sports car driver who decided that he should be next in line instead of a bike and drove accordingly, that's ignoring the number of other incidents which I'll put down to incompetence rather than malice.

Regardless of your claim to the word, it is oppressive to experience this treatment. I have to be careful what I say about my experiences because it upsets my wife when she hears what people do, and she can't believe what some drivers do.

Just because the oppression of cyclists is 2/10 compared with the 20/10 of Ukrainians and the 10/10 of a Windrush victim, does not mean it isn't a thing, nor should you assume it is unimportant. The attitude that cyclists are inhuman is observable, and it leads to the situation where motorists think it is acceptable to ram cyclists with their cars because they simply have disconnected from treating them as people.

And of course, if you are going to play the Ukraine card, then be prepared to justify your personal troubles with facing Russian shells - it is just whataboutery.

The reality is that humans are experts in spying differences and seem to have an instinctive desire to divide people into categories and assign those groups into friends or foe. Politicians, the press and plain old nasty people use those divisions for their own purposes. No group is safe from that behaviour. It would make the world a better place if nobody suffered abuse simply because of them being identified with a certain characteristic, wouldn't you say?